<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Breathing In</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.angelaspalmer.com/2009/10/breathing-in/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.angelaspalmer.com/2009/10/breathing-in/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:18:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: car insurance</title>
		<link>http://www.angelaspalmer.com/2009/10/breathing-in/comment-page-1/#comment-166</link>
		<dc:creator>car insurance</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:18:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://3xscreenstaging2.com/?p=493#comment-166</guid>
		<description>What&#039;s the difference between today&#039;s global-warming models and medieval astrology? Answer: We know which astrological models were correct.  That&#039;s the conclusion of scientist Kanya Kusano in a January report published by the Japan Society of Energy and Resources, an Osaka-based professional scientific association. The paper, recently translated into English by British technology news Web site the Register, argues that medieval astrologers confirmed their theories by testing their predictions against celestial events that actually unfolded. Similarly, today&#039;s climate science is so complex that only time -- and a lot more observation -- will tell whether what scientists think they know is really correct.  Until then, the alarmist findings by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are &quot;an unprovable hypothesis,&quot; Mr. Kusano argues. Two of his colleagues on the five-member panel agree.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What&#8217;s the difference between today&#8217;s global-warming models and medieval astrology? Answer: We know which astrological models were correct.  That&#8217;s the conclusion of scientist Kanya Kusano in a January report published by the Japan Society of Energy and Resources, an Osaka-based professional scientific association. The paper, recently translated into English by British technology news Web site the Register, argues that medieval astrologers confirmed their theories by testing their predictions against celestial events that actually unfolded. Similarly, today&#8217;s climate science is so complex that only time &#8212; and a lot more observation &#8212; will tell whether what scientists think they know is really correct.  Until then, the alarmist findings by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are &#8220;an unprovable hypothesis,&#8221; Mr. Kusano argues. Two of his colleagues on the five-member panel agree.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
